Right-o! The latest Samba knows about NFS and they should respect each
others' file-locks. You might consider using *only* one or the other,
if you tend toward manic about network traffic; there are only a few
options for doing NFS on windows, though... Samba does the SMB protocol
better than M$ on the other hand! NFS is UDP, so you might want to find
out if your network device (the SMC Barricade?) is a full-speed switch
or has the limiting problems of older routers: you'll want full-speed
100baseTX, with full duplex to connect the machines that will be doing
the major file-sharing, right folks? I'm not sure off the top of my
head, but I think our hard drives are fast enough to use 100base...
I've mostly done SCP ("SSH's FTP") for moving files around even trusted
networks... but it is certainly not as convenient as having a mount
point (or drag-n-drop, although gui SCP clients are sweet too).
Set up two major samba shares, where I've worked, they've been great and
are on an IDE-RAID, striped. Very solid; the only problems I've had are
on linux clients, which have shares mounted, when I restart the server
or just the service; those client have hung badly at times. I think
this problem is (or has been) fixed... haven't tested it in a while!
cheers,
Ben
On Thu, 2002-10-24 at 20:42, Bob Crandell wrote:
> In that case, Samba would be the easiest to get your files from Windows. Then you
> can use NFS to allow your Linux boxes to share files.
>
_______________________________________________
Eug-LUG mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
